The Sicatoka Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 At the end of the day it should be a factor in the decision. You bet it should; but not the factor in the decision. There's only one scenario where it would be the factor: If the NCAA were to say "We see 'no nickname' as breech and you're back on the sanctions list if you go that way." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 I feel obliged to point this out: This conversation has turned "binary" meaning "nickname/no nickname". The conversation at this point is officially "hexary" meaning there are six options (until Kelley waffles in the wind again). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND1983 Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 With all the PC bs going around and is the ultimate reason the Sioux name is gone, and you say no nickname people are the ones digging up dirt on an ex-president to not allow RR as a name?! That's the dumbest shyt I've ever heard! There are other choices you know, right? Have you been paying attention at all? The No Nickname people ARE the Sioux Forever people. They don't want a nickname so they can keep calling it them the Sioux. Of course they are going to tear apart each name choice, they don't want one! C'mon. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4evrSIOUX Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Given that Kelly wants a name other than "North Dakota", could it be that the NCAA is ok with it? If he were to publicize that, that would fuel the no name supporters? Just a thought! This would all end if the NCAA said we had to have a nickname. That hasn't happened and why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snova4 Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Have you been paying attention at all? The No Nickname people ARE the Sioux Forever people. They don't want a nickname so they can keep calling it them the Sioux. Of course they are going to tear apart each name choice, they don't want one! C'mon. No we're not all the Sioux forever crowd. I would love to have the Sioux back, but I understand that's not happening. I wouldn't be opposed to a new nickname but these poor excuses for options don't cut it. As I've said before, the best options in my opinion are Roughriders (the name of the local high school, how original), or Fighting Hawks (oh, another school with Hawks, how original). North Stars should have never been considered because Minnesota is the North Star State, not North Dakota. Sundogs is just dumb, as well as NoDaks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homer Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Given that Kelly wants a name other than "North Dakota", could it be that the NCAA is ok with it? If he were to publicize that, that would fuel the no name supporters? Just a thought! This would all end if the NCAA said we had to have a nickname. That hasn't happened and why? That is what some of us have been asking. Just get the NCAA to put in writing that being known as the University of North Dakota satisfies the agreement to seperate UND from the Fighting Sioux name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homer Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 No we're not all the Sioux forever crowd. I would love to have the Sioux back, but I understand that's not happening. I wouldn't be opposed to a new nickname but these poor excuses for options don't cut it. As I've said before, the best options in my opinion are Roughriders (the name of the local high school, how original), or Fighting Hawks (oh, another school with Hawks, how original). North Stars should have never been considered because Minnesota is the North Star State, not North Dakota. Sundogs is just dumb, as well as NoDaks. What are your ideas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snova4 Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 What are your ideas? At this point might as well call them the rose petals and parade them out in pink jerseys, Kelly would probably love that. Seriously though, I have no idea. I know I remember seeing names in the list that I didn't mind. If I remember right, I saw Big Horns in the list, I thought that would be something if done right would make a pretty sweet logo. I think my biggest issue is with just how unimaginative everything on this list is. What the hell did we pay this firm for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 That is what some of us have been asking. Just get the NCAA to put in writing that being known as the University of North Dakota satisfies the agreement to seperate UND from the Fighting Sioux name. I've said this before, I would be shocked if the NCAA issued any kind of statement either way about UND having a nickname or not having a nickname during this process. That isn't their style. After UND makes a decision, if UND decides to continue going without a nickname, and if the NCAA decides they don't like it, then the NCAA would make a statement. The statement would either invoke the settlement agreement or the Executive Committee could create a new policy requiring a nickname. But, I would be surprised if the NCAA allows themselves to get involved before they absolutely have to do so. They would prefer to have the issue go away on its own if possible. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxperfan7 Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 After thinking about this issue for awhile, the fact that Kelley hasn't come out and clearly stated that the NCAA has an issue with UND having no nickname leads me to believe that maybe the NCAA does not have a problem with it. If he clearly didn't want "no nickname" to be an option, he could just pull out the "the NCAA has a problem with it" card out of his back pocket to push his "agenda". (Of course it still may be in play and he may wait to play it if "North Dakota" moves on to the popular vote and comes out on top." Now lets just say that is the case. It is still in the best interest of the University to select a new nickname. First an foremost to move past the Fighting Sioux nickname debacle that has plagued this University, it's fanbase, and this state for a decade. Forget settlemet agreements, forget recruiting scare tactics, forget marketing opportunities. UND and all of its invested stakeholders need to move on from this issue. Not selecting a new nickname will not allow all of us to do that. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 I've said this before, I would be shocked if the NCAA issued any kind of statement either way about UND having a nickname or not having a nickname during this process. That isn't their style. After UND makes a decision, if UND decides to continue going without a nickname, and if the NCAA decides they don't like it, then the NCAA would make a statement. The statement would either invoke the settlement agreement or the Executive Committee could create a new policy requiring a nickname. But, I would be surprised if the NCAA allows themselves to get involved before they absolutely have to do so. They would prefer to have the issue go away on its own if possible. This guy might be on to something... What benefit is there for the NCAA to take a stand on a hypothetical situation? There literally is none. They have no obligation to UND other than to point at the signed settlement agreement (which does state UND must pick a new nickname but the interpretations of that have been debated enough). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benny Baker Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 That is what some of us have been asking. Just get the NCAA to put in writing that being known as the University of North Dakota satisfies the agreement to seperate UND from the Fighting Sioux name. It's already in writing, my friend. On September 24, 2012, the NCAA signed the addendum to the settlement agreement under which it confirmed that "UND has retired the 'Fighting Sioux' nickname and logo; and . . . the University of North Dakota will be removed from any list of institutions not in compliance with the Policy." UND obviously did not have a nickname at the time. If the absence of a nickname violated the Policy, there would have been no reason for the NCAA to proactively remove the nicknameless North Dakotans from sanctions. Now . . . , cue the speculative counter-argument that the NCAA was waiting for the "cooling off" period to end! There is absolutely NO evidence to support this assumption other than the beliefs of some misguided internet posters. How do we know this? Because these posters cannot provide quotes or citations. They will rely purely on conjecture and speculation. Just watch and see. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxphan27 Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 People on here have all sorts of opinions. No one of those people has wrote a letter to the editor, called radio stations or planned protests but those are ok right. At the end of the day it should be a factor in the decision. If it's all good with the NCAA than the leadership needs to come out and say so. We're on two different wavelengths here- my post a couple posts back was referring to people saying opposing coaches will use it in the future as a recruiting strike against UND. I did not say, and was not referring to, the issue the NCAA may or may not have with going nickname less. My point, and I'll state it again, permission for going with no nickname will have been decided with the NCAA before UND goes ahead and officially chooses no nickname, (I have at least that much faith in the UND administration). Thus, rendering all the scare tactics mentioned here regarding opposing schools and recruiting, moot. Or as some mimes would say, mute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxphan27 Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 It's been use by other coaches to recruit against UND. That is a FACT. You can choose to not believe it, but it is reality. The reality we should be concerned with is today's reality/situation. You're comparing apples and oranges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 It's already in writing, my friend. On September 24, 2012, the NCAA signed the addendum to the settlement agreement under which it confirmed that "UND has retired the 'Fighting Sioux' nickname and logo; and . . . the University of North Dakota will be removed from any list of institutions not in compliance with the Policy." UND obviously did not have a nickname at the time. If the absence of a nickname violated the Policy, there would have been no reason for the NCAA to proactively remove the nicknameless North Dakotans from sanctions. I know you know, but the Addendum to the Settlement Agreement was strictly done for the purpose of amending what imagery can be displayed and whatever it is you're trying to cite has nothing to do with its purpose. My point, and I'll state it again, permission for going with no nickname will have been decided with the NCAA before UND goes ahead and officially chooses no nickname, (I have at least that much faith in the UND administration). And what happens in the event that the NCAA declines to take a stance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamStrait Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 As Dave St. Peter said recently, "I thought there was something incredibly powerful and unique about having the words 'North Dakota' stand alone without a nickname." I think it can be made to be even more so with a clever marketing campaign. Wisconsin, adds a modified Budweiser jingle to the end of one of their school songs ("Varsity", I believe - but I could be mistaken), to wit, "When you've said Wisconsin, you've said it all." If UND were to continue without a nickname and do the same (When you've said North Dakota, you've said it all), it would actually have meaning and fit far better. I'd like to have a marketing plan along the lines of the following: Famous alums or persons associated with the university used in short video messages. Some examples: Show Jimmy Kleinsasser saying " When you've said North Dakota, you've said it all", then folds his massive arms in front of him in a defiant pose. Have Howard Walker, who you know is still rockin' a fu manchu and looking evil, say "North Dakota - wanna fight about it?" Matt Greene, "Just North Dakota, baby". Dave Hakstol and his stare - no sound, just the words "North Dakota", then go to a black screen where first the words "It's no good turning away" appear, followed by "You know he's still there". Others along these same lines are possible, using those such as Dave Osborn, T.J. Oshie, Zach Parise, Jonathan Toews, Commie, perhaps even the heretofore useless Phil Jackson could finally make himself useful. In this way I believe we can make not having a nickname interesting, create a following, and ultimately turn a weakness into a strength. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamStrait Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Also, for those that are adamant that UND pick a new nickname, as Brad Schlossman has said, the best way to get past no nickname is to have it on the final ballot, and then have it voted down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benny Baker Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 I know you know, but the addendum to the Addendum to the Settlement Agreement was strictly done for the purpose of amending what imagery can be displayed and whatever it is you're trying to cite has nothing to do with its purpose. And we have our first response without a quote or citation. Of course, you're free to speculate and provide conjecture. In reality, I'll stand by the previous quote: "UND has retired the 'Fighting Sioux' nickname and logo; and . . . the University of North Dakota will be removed from any list of institutions not in compliance with the Policy." Before more posters start speculating on this issue without evidence, quotes, or citations to anything, it's also important to remember that if there is conflict between the original settlement agreement and the addendum, the addendum states that "the following terms and conditions of this Addendum govern and control the rights and obligations of the parties." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamStrait Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 If the "no nickname" option makes the final ballot and wins, and IF and when the NCAA et al were to make a stink, then the next most popular option could at that point be adopted quickly and without additional fuss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benny Baker Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 If the "no nickname" option makes the final ballot and wins, and IF and when the NCAA et al were to make a stink, then the next most popular option could at that point be adopted quickly and without additional fuss. Good point. But we should also remember that the NCAA does not have a policy that sanctions universities for not having a nickname. To the contrary, the NCAA agreed that North Dakota was in compliance despite the lack of a nickname at UND. No need to worry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSSioux Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 I am definitely in the remaining North Dakota group and realize that the university will never use the Fighting Sioux in athletic competition again. My point has always been that if a nickname cannot beat out remaining North Dakota head to head, we should remain North Dakota. I just do not feel any of the remaining nicknames are better than remaining North Dakota. I do want to make a couple of points regarding the "we need a new nickname" folks regarding the marketing and profiting standpoint. There are many universities that stray away from their nicknames for marketing purposes, and I believe we can do that as well. A couple of examples are as follows: Stanford Cardinal - a university with a color as a nickname, but a tree as a symbol/mascot Auburn Tigers - rather generic nickname, but the "war eagle" chant/phrase is quite awesome Alabama Crimson Tide - What the heck does an elephant have to do with Alabama? I can give a few more, but you get the jest of it. I find it a great failure on marketing ability if we cannot do something around North Dakota. I will give a couple of examples that could be done from recent postings and usage: "Roll Tribe" could be used by either remaining North Dakota or with the nickname NoDaks. "Force of the North" was used on athletic posters in the mid 2000's and could be a good phrase that can be used. These are just a couple of examples, but if we actually had a marketing group worth anything they could do better, or maybe ask for suggestions on that front as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 http://www.ag.nd.gov/NCAA/AddendumToSettlement.pdf "provided the University remains in compliance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement and this Amendment". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 And we have our first response without a quote or citation. Of course, you're free to speculate and provide conjecture. In reality, I'll stand by the previous quote: "UND has retired the 'Fighting Sioux' nickname and logo; and . . . the University of North Dakota will be removed from any list of institutions not in compliance with the Policy." Before more posters start speculating on this issue without evidence, quotes, or citations to anything, it's also important to remember that if there is conflict between the original settlement agreement and the addendum, the addendum states that "the following terms and conditions of this Addendum govern and control the rights and obligations of the parties." And you are free to provide your speculation and conjecture as well. However you forgot an important part of the Addendum: "provided the University remains in compliance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement and this Amendment" The original Settlement called for UND to be removed from the sanctions list once it announced the retirement of the Fighting Sioux nickname and started on transition towards a new nickname and logo. That was the situation UND was in when the Addendum was signed. What benefit did the NCAA have to punish UND when they were showing that they were doing what they could in their power to work towards transitioning to a new nickname and logo? The NCAA also continues to have the power to punish or change their policies to punish UND as they see fit. What would stop them from putting a new policy in place to prevent a University from going with "no nickname" because it fosters an environment where a nickname that was previously deemed hostile and abusive is encouraged to be used. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND1983 Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 If the "no nickname" option makes the final ballot and wins, and IF and when the NCAA et al were to make a stink, then the next most popular option could at that point be adopted quickly and without additional fuss. Oh really? What about the past 5-10 years makes you think there wouldn't be any "fuss"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Good point. But we should also remember that the NCAA does not have a policy that sanctions universities for not having a nickname. ... today. Remember, they have a history of "Don Adam"-ing a new policy (see: August 5, 2005). And now it's even within their bylaws as the power has been given to the NCAA Executive Committee to wield as they see fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.